1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Buying chunkloaders separately

Discussion in 'Suggestions and Feedback' started by thepredatorwolf, Feb 23, 2020.

  1. thepredatorwolf

    thepredatorwolf Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    2
    Local Time:
    2:33 PM
    Greetings,i would like to know if there could be added an option to buy extra chunkloaders(with real money), that works only for the server we buy them,similar to how the claimblocks works,like 5 extra chunkloaders for 5€,but if i change modpack i would have to buy them again,but as said,unlike the patron ones,they last until the modpack does.
    (ofc i am talking about the normal chunkloaders,the iron ones,so that wouldn't be too heavy on the server)

    Usually that's what i always buy wherever this option is present,because i don't like the monthly payment,even if i switch more packs in the same mounth,and i end up paying more buying them for each pack,i think is more a psychological thing xD,anyway,i think that would be great if could be added!

    Have a good day!
     
  2. Sandstroem

    Sandstroem Patron Tier 3 Booster

    Messages:
    1,275
    Likes Received:
    659
    Local Time:
    1:33 PM
    What do you mean by extra chunkloader? Extra tickets? Extra maximum number of chunks?

    As long as everyone gets it if someone buys it I think that should be possible. I could imagine a chunkloader ticket kit, which when opened gives everyone who is on the server x amount of tickets.

    Same for extra chunks. Let's say a +3 online chunks Server upgrade.
     
    LadyRen13 and dragon87tamer like this.
  3. dragon87tamer

    dragon87tamer Senior Moderator Patron Tier 3

    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    317
    Local Time:
    12:33 PM
    i think thats a good idea, Could do 3 tiers for chunkloaders, small medium large,

    Example : Small = +3 online chunks, +1 offline chunk, 2 million chunk loading tickets.
    Medium = +6 online chunks, +2 offline chunks, 4 million chunk loading tickets.
    Large = +9 online chunks, +3 offline chunks, 6 million chunk loading tickets

    obviously would need more ideas, and such. But that would be a basic idea to it!
     
    LadyRen13 and thepredatorwolf like this.
  4. Sandstroem

    Sandstroem Patron Tier 3 Booster

    Messages:
    1,275
    Likes Received:
    659
    Local Time:
    1:33 PM
    One thing to consider is that in contrast to most kits these ones will actually end up in increasing server resources, so they probably have to be much more expensive than what you suggest @dragon87tamer
     
  5. Cantiel

    Cantiel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    11
    Local Time:
    1:33 PM
    i like the idea for online loaders, as it gives the players the chance to spread their base more, than stuffing all the important machines into a small area.

    i do see problems with offline loaders though, as many of the grindy packs have strong lag setups for endgame automation, and having more offline loader in those packs will only make it worse
     
  6. thepredatorwolf

    thepredatorwolf Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    2
    Local Time:
    2:33 PM
    My idea was that whoever needs some chunkloaders,spends 5$,and he gets the right to place more of them,but i don't know how the eula works,if all the players must have access to them,then i don't think is the best idea xD,the price might go up a lot,and probably the kit will have a duration,but if every player that wants them,pays separately,the price can be lowered,and the duration can be extended to the modpack's life

    Regarding the performance,well,is better to have 100 machines in 4 chunks than in all 1,a base more spread is better,but that's only the case with the online-only chunkloadrs (iron one) that's why i only talked about them,because the other ones might hit too much the performance and would probably be left apart,especially if everyone gets the kit.

    Well,i guess we need some higher-up that knows if this stuff can be implemented,and in which condition,i'm glad the suggestion got some good feedback :)
     
    Cantiel likes this.

Share This Page